Sorry, but this is nonsense. UNIX *is* more secure than Windows, but Windows was *designed* with more security in mind. UNIX comes from an academic background where loose and free access is the norm (or was in the 70s). All of the security trappings are post-hoc.
Now if you want to say that UNIX's technical excellence is demonstrated by the fact that even security being a crude add-on, it's still superior to Windows' baked-in attempts, then you would of course be right. But UNIX was never designed for security from the ground up...
Yeah, I'm a "real" sysadmin as well. However, I haven't drunk the Veritas kool-aid;)
There's no way, no how that they could write a volume manager or filesystem product that's even in the same league with VxFS and VxVM.
Because they are GODS who brought down REVEALED TRUTH from the MOUNTAIN OF SYSADMIN GOODNESS...
No way/no how? Pshaw. First, Veritas VxFS and VxVM are not the only products in this space - AIX ships with volume managers and file systems that are just as nice and so do other Unices. Second, they are not terribly complicated products. All they really add is another layer of indirection. And third, there are filesystems for Linux written by IBM/SGI/other people who've been to the mountain (VM isn't quite there yet)
BTW, Veritas system products are generally a pain because they're a third-party add-on. That is one thing I like about AIX and HP-UX - the LVM is integrated.
The clustering product is also very, very robust.
VCS is nice but over-priced. Again, not the only player (though one of the better ones).
Does anyone else here know what Foundation Suite is?
No - we are all fake sysadmins who can only play with Linux because we can't get real sysadmin jobs. Please, real sysadmin, come down from the mount and give us your wisdom.
(For those who really don't know, FS is just VxVM and VxFS bundled together. It's also a convenient way for Veritas to say "you have to buy this before you can buy other stuff, even if you don't need it, because, like, it's the FOUNDATION, man")
FS is an over-priced remedy for Sun's defects. It's a hidden tax on every Solaris system. It has little penetration outside of Solaris because other operating systems come with their own "full volume management solutions" (thereby leveraging value-added synergistic paradigms to provide excellent enterprise ROI).
FS is a nice product but I do not genuflect before it.
This is for real volume management, real disk
replacement, real mirroring/striping/etc.
Real, real, real, dammit! REAL! Not that fake stuff you fake sysadmins are doing! I'm talking my REAL stuff!
I hate to tell you this, but there is plenty of "real" storage management done outside the Sun/Veritas world: AIX, HP-UX, mainframes, AS/400, and...gasp...Linux, sometimes without Veritas!
Having seen different products, and knowing Veritas far more intimately than I want to, I can't say that Linux + Veritas would be my preferred combo.
And VxFS is probably the most kick-ass filesystem I've ever used. The journaling alone is just fantastic, and the speed.... damn, it's fast.
Even better, using Quick I/O....
I have nothing against VxFS - a fine product. But hardly manna from heaven. A filesystem design has to be one of the most easily commoditized pieces of IT.
Real businesses trust their data to real companies. Veritas is one of 'em.
Yeah, I work in a "real" business and having had "real" experience with Veritas I can tell you that they are a "real" pain in the ass.
Veritas is a sick company. Their support has nosedived and their products of late have been orders of magnitude less reliable than years ago.
To sum up: Veritas is just a software company, not the messiah.
"[Apple's music store]... is a drawback for Windows users, who expect choice in music services, choice in devices, and choice in music from a wide-variety of music services to burn to a CD or put on a portable device."
Last time I looked, my truck's 9-year-old CD player didn't support DRM. I thought Microsoft was pushing various DRM schemes...? And here we have them saying that consumers expect DRM-free music...
Mail it and have a procmail-driven script that puts it in the right directory. Use perl's MIME and other mail modules to make it easy (both for sending and procmail). No, this isn't 100% secure, but the potential damage is not much worse than mail-bombing - the worst someone could do is intentionally fill up your storage...which they can probably already do. And there's no password at all this way.
I find it hysterical that Slashdot - hosted in Holland, Michigan, which is (a) the wart on the ass of Michigan, (b set in a dry county, (c) a place where until recently MTV was not offered because it offended the local populace so, and (d) home of various colleges (like some of the Slashdot crew's alma mater) where creationsim is taught - would refer to Portland, Oregon's suburbs as "backwater".
Kids, I grew up in West Michigan and live in Portland and on the scale of "who has more atavistic hicks mired in 19th century thinking," Holland Michigan and Ottawa County lead the pack.
I've read it cover to cover and use it frequently. Definitely the best perl book I've read (with the list of "perl books I've read" consisting of most of the O'Reilly line).
Conway covers OOP theory, how to apply it in perl, neat perl-only tricks, and a lot of fun stuff. His examples are hilarious and his writing among the best traditions of technical instruction.
Even OOP aside, I learned more about perl from Damian's book than anything else I've read. Highly recommended.
"When it ultimately breaks" implies that it will, which is not always the case. Also, you are paying for a SIZE of repair that may not occur. If you pay $100 for AppleCare and only have a $50 repair, then being self-insured was a better bet.
It is a guess, of course. Most of the literature (consumer advice, consumer reports, etc.) weighs against extended warranties, which is what I base my analysis on.
...extended warranties are bad. I don't know specifically about AppleCare.
Consider that they wouldn't sell it if they couldn't make money on it. For the cost of an extended warranty, you're paying cost of repair + profit to Apple + commission to salesman. Oh, and opportunity cost for your money as well.
To calculate what they charge for extended warranty, the company uses probability to determine the most likely cost of a repair over X years. It's simple probability math:.05 probability of Y breaking in 1 year,.10 of Z breaking in 2 years, etc. They figure out what the cost is and then tack on profit and commission and offer it to you.
In nearly all cases, it's better to be self-insured. Your mileage may vary, of course...and unfortunately, Apple won't give you the probability formulas they use to make the numbers;)
"What were the AWK and AMPL languages designed for?"
"Brian, what do you think of UNIX? Is it a good and reliable platform for development?"
"Is it true that you suggested the name "UNIX" for the long ago OS, Multics? What does that word mean?"
"What are your hobbies? Reading? Sports?"
"Could you say that you love computers (IT)?"
Etc. What a waste of a good man's time.
Nearly all the interview questions are either (a) things widely available in the literature (as in FAQs, not digging research - did the interviewer really not know what AWK stood for? If so, shame on him), or (b) idiotic questions that I might ask if I was interviewing a 6th grader.
If you can't think of anything interesting to ask your subject, don't bother with the interview!
The single biggest problem is that Interstate 70 (which runs across the northern section of the state) goes through some of the most MIND-NUMBINGLY BORING terrain I've ever seen, and since that is how most people who cross the state see it they form an unjustified opinion.
I disagree. I've driven that section of I-70 and quite enjoyed it. Heck, a lot of it isn't even flat - there are awe very pretty pastoral hills.
How to Get to Be a Manager: Longevity is probably the easiest route. Eventually you'll get to a spot where there's an opening and you'll have an opportunity to move up. If it doesn't appear to be in the future in your company, then consider looking elsewhere. Most places looking for managers will say "the ideal candidate will have 4-6 years of management experience." Well, that's nice, but until he comes along, here you are with X years of technical leadership, project management, team leading, etc. Don't lie but if you've lead teams of people, etc. then you probably are as good as the next bloke.
Don't fret about qualifications, etc. Sure, at some point someone will say "what do you think the residual value of this asset will be in three years and would you recommend lease or buy?" At that point you'll say "I don't understand" and go out and learn.
How to Succeed at Being a Manager: Management requires a radically different skill set than being a programmer or sysadmin. I spent 7 years in Unix sysadmin, rising to Senior Admin, then moved into management. As a techie, your skills are all technical, with some project management and communication (written, presentation) to round you out. As a manager, it's the reverse, with the emphasis on communication and project management, with a whole galaxy of people-management skills and financial skills thrown in.
The technical part of being a manager is not complicated. Go read some books or take some extension courses. The basics of accounting, budgeting, project tracking, etc. can be quickly learned. Focus on leadership and people skills. That's the heart of management. The rest is just details.
If you are serious about management, then get an MBA. Be aware that means the full shot: accounting, economics, marketing, etc. There are some quality all-internet programs (Penn State, Arizona State, Auburn, etc.), or executive MBA programs. People with MBAs are not usually managing technical groups, though - they're senior managers or moving towards the executive ranks (or doing financial analysis).
The "soft" skills you'll need are a lot more difficult - negotiation, handling employee problems, building consensus, resolving disputes, etc. What do you do when someone is underperforming? How do you measure it? Etc. It all sounds easier than it really is. Then there's leadership...both in doing it and taking responsibility.
As a manager, you will interact a lot more with non-technical people. You also may not like it - do you like going to meetings now? If not, forget management - you might be in meetings all day (meetings seems a constant regardless of organization).
In closing...techies have long sneered at managers, but frankly it's just as challenging a career path as pure technical paths. I divide managers into those that "get it" and those that don't. Most of those who "get it" are people with technical backgrounds who later went into management.
That's it - ask. Bring some data and make your case. If they say no, you can either swallow it or look for a new job.
There is often a "loyalty penalty" in organizations. Someone who works for many years and gets yearly raises will make less than someone who comes in at market rates. It sucks but it's very common.
Does Microsoft sell direct? Some of the biggest do not. Weirdly, you can buy Sun (for example) direct, but you get better pricing (by a LOT) if you go through a VAR because Sun wants to support that channel. There are some manufacturers (in this and other industries) which simply do not sell direct ever - you want the goods, you buy from a VAR, even though the manufacturer may still have a sales force (sort of a "regional rep").
I don't buy MS but I'm wondering if they use the same model, in which case the Army using a VAR wouldn't surprise me.
I don't mean to be rude, but perhaps the local library has better resources than Slashdot. I'd wager that an afternoon spent perusing books on small claims and how to collect would give you all the information you need.
Second, you're not the first person to face this. In fact, it's a chronic problem with small claims judgements. Did you ask the court? Did you ask the sheriff? Did you ask the county clerk? Why would you ask Slashdot before asking real (omigosh! meatspace!) people who are on the scene with you?
Finally, I'd google a bit...30 seconds' work took me to several links on how to collect.
I really hate the MMORG model: $XX at the retail store + monthly fee. Why can't they just let people download the game (or buy it for $10)? $50 is a lot to gamble on a game you might not like after a month.
Yeah, I know - it's to squeeze more money out of Joe Consumer. But I still hate it. I suppose with any game you're taking the risk that you won't like it or will get tired of it quickly.
I think of Diablo II - great game that's fun even without the online experience. And they don't charge for that. So if a game company is going to sell a game that has *only* an online experience, why charge for the $50 shiny box?
Well, sure it could be TV...or it could be the Maoist insurgents the Bhutanese have been fighting for the last few years (since '96, actually). Now who do you think is more likely to contribute to a culture of violence: Maoists who agitate for armed revolution, or Nickelodeon?
But blaming TV is very elitist and one should never underestimate the human desire to perceive oneself as superior to others.
This task would be beyond daunting. They don't even seem to have or want to devote teh resources to cleaning up inactive accounts. To sweep through the ?millions? of accounts and cross-check the 20-30 items average each has would be insane.
No it wouldn't. There are several algorithms that would make this a simple thing to code. The actual running of the program (or query, as it's probably a database on the back end) would take some time, but it's not like they're under any deadline except one they set for themselves. Even so, if there are 2 million players (complete guess) and each has 30 items, of which half are worth examining (not health potions and such), that's only 2 mil * 15 = 30 mil rows to examine. Not small but not huge. Look at it another way - if each row is 1K, that's 30GB, which is a small database.
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, but this is nonsense. UNIX *is* more secure than Windows, but Windows was *designed* with more security in mind. UNIX comes from an academic background where loose and free access is the norm (or was in the 70s). All of the security trappings are post-hoc.
Now if you want to say that UNIX's technical excellence is demonstrated by the fact that even security being a crude add-on, it's still superior to Windows' baked-in attempts, then you would of course be right. But UNIX was never designed for security from the ground up...
There's no way, no how that they could write a volume manager or filesystem product that's even in the same league with VxFS and VxVM.
Because they are GODS who brought down REVEALED TRUTH from the MOUNTAIN OF SYSADMIN GOODNESS...
No way/no how? Pshaw. First, Veritas VxFS and VxVM are not the only products in this space - AIX ships with volume managers and file systems that are just as nice and so do other Unices. Second, they are not terribly complicated products. All they really add is another layer of indirection. And third, there are filesystems for Linux written by IBM/SGI/other people who've been to the mountain (VM isn't quite there yet)
BTW, Veritas system products are generally a pain because they're a third-party add-on. That is one thing I like about AIX and HP-UX - the LVM is integrated.
The clustering product is also very, very robust.
VCS is nice but over-priced. Again, not the only player (though one of the better ones).
Does anyone else here know what Foundation Suite is?
No - we are all fake sysadmins who can only play with Linux because we can't get real sysadmin jobs. Please, real sysadmin, come down from the mount and give us your wisdom.
(For those who really don't know, FS is just VxVM and VxFS bundled together. It's also a convenient way for Veritas to say "you have to buy this before you can buy other stuff, even if you don't need it, because, like, it's the FOUNDATION, man")
FS is an over-priced remedy for Sun's defects. It's a hidden tax on every Solaris system. It has little penetration outside of Solaris because other operating systems come with their own "full volume management solutions" (thereby leveraging value-added synergistic paradigms to provide excellent enterprise ROI).
FS is a nice product but I do not genuflect before it.
This is for real volume management, real disk replacement, real mirroring/striping/etc.
Real, real, real, dammit! REAL! Not that fake stuff you fake sysadmins are doing! I'm talking my REAL stuff!
I hate to tell you this, but there is plenty of "real" storage management done outside the Sun/Veritas world: AIX, HP-UX, mainframes, AS/400, and...gasp...Linux, sometimes without Veritas!
Having seen different products, and knowing Veritas far more intimately than I want to, I can't say that Linux + Veritas would be my preferred combo.
And VxFS is probably the most kick-ass filesystem I've ever used. The journaling alone is just fantastic, and the speed.... damn, it's fast. Even better, using Quick I/O....
I have nothing against VxFS - a fine product. But hardly manna from heaven. A filesystem design has to be one of the most easily commoditized pieces of IT.
Real businesses trust their data to real companies. Veritas is one of 'em.
Yeah, I work in a "real" business and having had "real" experience with Veritas I can tell you that they are a "real" pain in the ass.
Veritas is a sick company. Their support has nosedived and their products of late have been orders of magnitude less reliable than years ago.
To sum up: Veritas is just a software company, not the messiah.
Last time I looked, my truck's 9-year-old CD player didn't support DRM. I thought Microsoft was pushing various DRM schemes...? And here we have them saying that consumers expect DRM-free music...
Or just use scp, which is easier still.
(Eh, I'm probably the only here old enough to remember that scandal...)
If you've ever wanted proof that the Slashdot "editors" barely read the submissions, here it is...a submission with no link to the story.
Kids, I grew up in West Michigan and live in Portland and on the scale of "who has more atavistic hicks mired in 19th century thinking," Holland Michigan and Ottawa County lead the pack.
2003-08-12 00:11:35 Jury Orders Microsoft to Pay $520 Million (articles,microsoft) (rejected)
In the FAQ there is a question:
"I could try asking permission, but do you want to wait 6 hours for a cool breaking story while we wait for permission to link someone?"
The answer would be yes, of course. But Malda refuses to ask this question to the readers. I know because I tried:
2003-04-08 23:29:59 Permission to Link (Ask the Audience the Q in the FAQ) (polls,slashdot) (rejected)
What the hell?
Angband's save files are cross-platform so you can play anywhere. May even give you a chance of finishing it before you die ;)
I've read it cover to cover and use it frequently. Definitely the best perl book I've read (with the list of "perl books I've read" consisting of most of the O'Reilly line). Conway covers OOP theory, how to apply it in perl, neat perl-only tricks, and a lot of fun stuff. His examples are hilarious and his writing among the best traditions of technical instruction. Even OOP aside, I learned more about perl from Damian's book than anything else I've read. Highly recommended.
I really have no idea how the "wet sciences" work...just curious.
It is a guess, of course. Most of the literature (consumer advice, consumer reports, etc.) weighs against extended warranties, which is what I base my analysis on.
Consider that they wouldn't sell it if they couldn't make money on it. For the cost of an extended warranty, you're paying cost of repair + profit to Apple + commission to salesman. Oh, and opportunity cost for your money as well.
To calculate what they charge for extended warranty, the company uses probability to determine the most likely cost of a repair over X years. It's simple probability math: .05 probability of Y breaking in 1 year, .10 of Z breaking in 2 years, etc. They figure out what the cost is and then tack on profit and commission and offer it to you.
In nearly all cases, it's better to be self-insured. Your mileage may vary, of course...and unfortunately, Apple won't give you the probability formulas they use to make the numbers ;)
"Brian, what do you think of UNIX? Is it a good and reliable platform for development?"
"Is it true that you suggested the name "UNIX" for the long ago OS, Multics? What does that word mean?"
"What are your hobbies? Reading? Sports?"
"Could you say that you love computers (IT)?"
Etc. What a waste of a good man's time.
Nearly all the interview questions are either (a) things widely available in the literature (as in FAQs, not digging research - did the interviewer really not know what AWK stood for? If so, shame on him), or (b) idiotic questions that I might ask if I was interviewing a 6th grader.
If you can't think of anything interesting to ask your subject, don't bother with the interview!
I disagree. I've driven that section of I-70 and quite enjoyed it. Heck, a lot of it isn't even flat - there are awe very pretty pastoral hills.
How to Get to Be a Manager: Longevity is probably the easiest route. Eventually you'll get to a spot where there's an opening and you'll have an opportunity to move up. If it doesn't appear to be in the future in your company, then consider looking elsewhere. Most places looking for managers will say "the ideal candidate will have 4-6 years of management experience." Well, that's nice, but until he comes along, here you are with X years of technical leadership, project management, team leading, etc. Don't lie but if you've lead teams of people, etc. then you probably are as good as the next bloke.
Don't fret about qualifications, etc. Sure, at some point someone will say "what do you think the residual value of this asset will be in three years and would you recommend lease or buy?" At that point you'll say "I don't understand" and go out and learn.
How to Succeed at Being a Manager: Management requires a radically different skill set than being a programmer or sysadmin. I spent 7 years in Unix sysadmin, rising to Senior Admin, then moved into management. As a techie, your skills are all technical, with some project management and communication (written, presentation) to round you out. As a manager, it's the reverse, with the emphasis on communication and project management, with a whole galaxy of people-management skills and financial skills thrown in.
The technical part of being a manager is not complicated. Go read some books or take some extension courses. The basics of accounting, budgeting, project tracking, etc. can be quickly learned. Focus on leadership and people skills. That's the heart of management. The rest is just details.
If you are serious about management, then get an MBA. Be aware that means the full shot: accounting, economics, marketing, etc. There are some quality all-internet programs (Penn State, Arizona State, Auburn, etc.), or executive MBA programs. People with MBAs are not usually managing technical groups, though - they're senior managers or moving towards the executive ranks (or doing financial analysis).
The "soft" skills you'll need are a lot more difficult - negotiation, handling employee problems, building consensus, resolving disputes, etc. What do you do when someone is underperforming? How do you measure it? Etc. It all sounds easier than it really is. Then there's leadership...both in doing it and taking responsibility.
As a manager, you will interact a lot more with non-technical people. You also may not like it - do you like going to meetings now? If not, forget management - you might be in meetings all day (meetings seems a constant regardless of organization).
In closing...techies have long sneered at managers, but frankly it's just as challenging a career path as pure technical paths. I divide managers into those that "get it" and those that don't. Most of those who "get it" are people with technical backgrounds who later went into management.
Heck, I think the Tomcat just flying by the Zero would have downed it...
There is often a "loyalty penalty" in organizations. Someone who works for many years and gets yearly raises will make less than someone who comes in at market rates. It sucks but it's very common.
I don't buy MS but I'm wondering if they use the same model, in which case the Army using a VAR wouldn't surprise me.
Second, you're not the first person to face this. In fact, it's a chronic problem with small claims judgements. Did you ask the court? Did you ask the sheriff? Did you ask the county clerk? Why would you ask Slashdot before asking real (omigosh! meatspace!) people who are on the scene with you?
Finally, I'd google a bit...30 seconds' work took me to several links on how to collect.
Yeah, I know - it's to squeeze more money out of Joe Consumer. But I still hate it. I suppose with any game you're taking the risk that you won't like it or will get tired of it quickly.
I think of Diablo II - great game that's fun even without the online experience. And they don't charge for that. So if a game company is going to sell a game that has *only* an online experience, why charge for the $50 shiny box?
I'll pass.
But of course, since you used the F-word, you must be right.
But blaming TV is very elitist and one should never underestimate the human desire to perceive oneself as superior to others.
No it wouldn't. There are several algorithms that would make this a simple thing to code. The actual running of the program (or query, as it's probably a database on the back end) would take some time, but it's not like they're under any deadline except one they set for themselves. Even so, if there are 2 million players (complete guess) and each has 30 items, of which half are worth examining (not health potions and such), that's only 2 mil * 15 = 30 mil rows to examine. Not small but not huge. Look at it another way - if each row is 1K, that's 30GB, which is a small database.